» Articles » PMID: 32570045

Comparison of Commercial Realtime Reverse Transcription PCR Assays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2

Overview
Journal J Clin Virol
Specialty Microbiology
Date 2020 Jun 23
PMID 32570045
Citations 49
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The emergence of a new coronavirus in Wuhan China has triggered a global need for accurate diagnostic assays. Initially, mostly laboratory developed molecular tests were available but shortly thereafter different commercial assays started to appear and are still increasing in number. Although independent performance evaluations are ongoing, available data is still scarce. Here we provide a direct comparison of key performance characteristics of 13 commercial RT-PCR assays. Thirteen RT-PCR assays were selected based on the criteria that they can be used following generic RNA extraction protocols, on common PCR platforms and availability. Using a 10-fold and 2-fold dilution series of a quantified SARS-CoV-2 cell-cultured virus stock, performance was assessed compared to our in house validated assay. Specificity was tested by using RNA extracted from cultured common human coronaviruses. All RT-PCR kits included in this study exhibited PCR efficiencies > 90%, except for the Sentinel Diagnostics B E-gene RUO assay (80%). Analytical sensitivity varied between 3.3 RNA copies to 330 RNA copies. Only one assay cross reacted with another human coronavirus (MERS). This study provides a technical baseline of 13 different commercial PCR assays for SARS-CoV-2 detection that can be used by laboratories interested in purchasing any of these for further full clinical validation.

Citing Articles

RT-qPCR Testing and Performance Metrics in the COVID-19 Era.

Bustin S Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(17).

PMID: 39273275 PMC: 11394961. DOI: 10.3390/ijms25179326.


A Comparative Analysis of Molecular Biological Methods for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 and Testing the In Vitro Infectivity of the Virus.

Shishkova K, Sirakova B, Shishkov S, Stoilova E, Mladenov H, Sirakov I Microorganisms. 2024; 12(1).

PMID: 38258006 PMC: 10819592. DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms12010180.


Prospective, clinical comparison of self-collected throat-bilateral nares swabs and saline gargle compared to health care provider collected nasopharyngeal swabs among symptomatic outpatients with potential SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Hempel E, Bharmal A, Li G, Minhas A, Manan R, Doull K J Assoc Med Microbiol Infect Dis Can. 2024; 8(4):283-298.

PMID: 38250616 PMC: 10797771. DOI: 10.3138/jammi-2023-0002.


Rapid Environmental Monitoring, Capture, and Destruction Activities of SARS-CoV-2 and Bacterial Pathogens During the COVID-19 Health Emergency.

Talukdar D, Marchetti R, Pileci R Cureus. 2023; 15(10):e46851.

PMID: 37954701 PMC: 10637348. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.46851.


Comparative Analysis of the Prevalence of Bovine Viral Diarrhea Virus in Cattle Populations Based on Detection Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Werid G, Hemmatzadeh F, Miller D, Reichel M, Messele Y, Petrovski K Pathogens. 2023; 12(8).

PMID: 37624027 PMC: 10459101. DOI: 10.3390/pathogens12081067.


References
1.
Corman V, Landt O, Kaiser M, Molenkamp R, Meijer A, Chu D . Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Euro Surveill. 2020; 25(3). PMC: 6988269. DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045. View

2.
van Kasteren P, van der Veer B, van den Brink S, Wijsman L, de Jonge J, van den Brandt A . Comparison of seven commercial RT-PCR diagnostic kits for COVID-19. J Clin Virol. 2020; 128:104412. PMC: 7206434. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104412. View

3.
Matheeussen V, Loens K, Lammens C, Vilken T, Koopmans M, Goossens H . Preparedness of European diagnostic microbiology labs for detection of SARS-CoV-2, March 2020. J Clin Virol. 2020; 128:104432. PMC: 7227504. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104432. View